Not a book review

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well the conversation has changed a little and I guess I'm part of the group who doesn't spend very much on books.

Currently the average cost I spend on an ancient coin is $72.02 (including shipping & fees). As a generalist, it's hard to swallow an expensive book for a coin type I'll only buy one of. I know I'm missing out on important information that would increase my pleasure. So for now I'm reading generalist books like Sayles.

 

Lets be clear on the confusion here. There are three Harlan books. The third is a revised update of the first and both cover 63-49 BC. The first was selling used for high prices when the revision came out and I see no reason to buy it. As I recall, it had a two toned orange red cover. The revised one has a gray cover, better photos and corrects some errors while selling new for $50. It is worth it. The middle volume covers 81-64 BC and has a solid red cover. It has half the information of the new volume mostly because we know a lot less about the period it covers. It costs $25 and is worth that IMHO.

 

FWIW, I have poured over your site extensively for a couple of years as I built out my library of key catalogues. It has been indispensable to my research, especially for issues after 1980 not covered by Spring.

BTW, I had dinner with John Spring in London earlier this year and was able thank him in person for his contribution to numismatic literature.

I have always wanted to thank you for creating your website, now being a good opportunity. Thank you, Warren!

 

I haven't commented because I don't own the Harlan books. I am a huge book fan, but I don't feel the need to own every new book that comes out in my collecting area, unless it's worthwhile. I had read some critical reviews of the first edition of Harlan's book several hears ago, so I never bought it. Maybe the criticisms have been addressed in the revised edition and second volume. If so, I'm willing to reconsider buying them. As I vaguely recall, the criticisms of the first edition largely concerned Harlan's dating of certain issues as contrary to hoard evidence. Interpretation of types can often be subjective, so I'll consider anyone's point of view on that subject.

 

I agree 100% and have avoided many books for that reason. The question is how many coins do I need to have in a period before I feel the need for a book. The answer is obviously on how much those coins mean to me and how much the book cost. I have 31 coins in the range of Harlan and really like books that cover history and not just prices realized. That was enough IMHO. Each will be different on the threshold.

With books of any sort, it can be hard to find books simple enough one can understand and not so simple one could have written equally well. Now we have to add books on subjects not found as well covered online.

 

This is where my interest lies. History of the period, coin minting, theories about design or explanations of the significance of the images on the coin is what I want to read about. I'm not interested in catalog numbers because I don't own any catalogs. I've heard here that RIC is great for the footnotes - but my gosh I collect from the entire period of the Roman Empire.

In my token collection, catalog numbers are useful because I have that catalog so I understand the usefulness of catalog numbers.

 

The main critical reviews reviews pointed out that his dates did not fit all (emphasis on all) the evidence. One was written by a man who had just written his own book on the same topic (which, by the way, also got a bad review). I tried to say above that NO ONE has found a way to fit all the evidence. Seriation from some hoard or other doesn't fit, or some date-of-office in the cursus honorum doesn't fit, or some quibble appears. If you want to read a book about Republican coins that is "right", don't bother to read anything. We simply don't know enough (and, maybe never will) to explain who all those moneyers were and when they struck their coins.

However, if you want to read about the moneyers and their times and types, Harlan is definitely worthwhile. There are some really good stories in those books.

 

Thanks, @Valentinian . I agree with your sentiment above that 100% certainty from limited evidence and 100% agreement on interpretation of limited evidence is unlikely in Roman Republican numismatics. I may buy the books. FWIW, I've heard that the new edition is improved.

 

Going with the "why buy books?" theme that this thread has evolved to: sure, there is a lot of info available on the web.

But there is a lot of info that is not yet available on the web.

And that is why I buy books. I know that there are a bunch of websites that have catalogued and reproduced a lot of the information available, but they still don't quite measure up to a good library.

I actually hope that resources like the Newman Numismatic Portal make a lot of obscure and arcane references available. Things like old auction archives can be valuable resources - but realistically, we probably use them to find a single lot in a decade of catalogues. Do I want to buy an entire decade of auction listings to find the one lot that I'm after? No, I'd rather that was on a searchable website. This is the 21st century, and it makes sense for collectors to use technology. There will always be someone who wants the old catalogue or book because it is an old book - but the information in there is valuable as well.

 

I have greatly slowed down my book buying. My within-reach bookcase holds 12' of books. It is now full, so every book acquisition also means an eviction.

However, space isn't why I have stopped buying. With so many free online references it seems somewhat anti-social to refer to expensive and difficult-to-obtain books. If someone asks me to identify something and I could point him to Wildwinds it seems unkind to refer to an expensive and rare SNG supplement.

For my own library, cost isn't a big concern. Although I prefer cheap ex-libris and damaged books to full price I can usually afford the full price. Yet a $300 book is permanently out of reach for young numismatists and most academics and collectors in "source countries." There is a lot to be said for information that can be socially shared.

 

I just finished Harlan's red-cover book on moneyers for the years 81-64 B.C.. Overall, I really enjoyed it so here are some thoughts and ramblings before I go to bed:

Harlan does a great job of pulling together the history of the period, the mythology, the hoard evidence(even though some of his interpretations are debated), and the traditions of various towns around Italy to tell the story of the men who minted these coins. Where this book shines in my opinion is in how well Harlan is able to extract little pieces of Roman society, for instance various public games, and explain their significance and the customs and events surrounding them in a way that in my opinion would make sense even to someone who is otherwise not well acquainted with the history of the Republic. For this reason, I think Harlan is an important book and I very much enjoyed the context that he provided around the devices chosen by many of the moneyers of this period, particularly those who were "new men" and are of the first generation of Rome's recently-enfranchised Italian allies to begin working their way through the Cursus Honorum.

As far as my criticisms of Harlan, as has already been pointed out, his reading of the hoard evidence is certainly debatable. These arguments can be found across the net, so I am not going to go into them here. Additionally, I disagree somewhat with his firm stance that all "SC" issues were minted by higher magistrates - some certainly were, but I think it equally probable that some were minted by the regular moneyers either in special circumstances as needs arose during the year or for specific payments that might require a mintage for one singular purpose. That said, I do not think these criticisms outweigh the overall importance of Harlan's work. I think one can largely ignore some of his more debatable choices(i.e. his placing of the issues of Q Pomponius Musa) and read the book for its discussion of the context of what these moneyers put on their coins and how that relates to their origins and events of the times, and I think that Harlan has made it very approachable even for a novice in this area and for that reason, I think it is an important book and would wholeheartedly recommend it to those who collect the coins of this period.

 

I purchased both of these books last year, but have not gotten around to reading them yet. I only have a handful of Republican coins and even fewer that fall within the range covered by Mr. Harlan. I plan to dive into them soon.

 

(reply see next post)

 

I just came across this forum and, as the author of the books being discussed, I thought I’d make a few comments. The harshest criticism my books received had to do with the dating especially with two moneyers, Plaetorius Cestianus and Pomponius Musa. I assigned those moneyers to years before 64 BCE and that was contrary to the Mesagne hoard evidence. I held that opinion in both books. But, after thrashing it out with some of my critics, I decided I was wrong and revised the dates and moved the moneyers into the second edition of the book dealing with the years 63 BCE to 49 BCE. The interesting thing was that it did not dramatically change my interpretation of the designs of either coin. Andthat is what I think is important and some of you on this forum also grasp that point. There will never be agreement on the dating. I was always more interested in the message found in the design, but I had to make some determination of date in order to interpret the coins. The dating of the coins in the period 81 BCE- 64 BCE is the most difficult because so many of the moneyers are unknown. But the coin designs from that era contain some of the more interesting messages and reveal how newly enfranchised citizens from distant Italian cities began to move into Roman politics. They are talking to their fellow citizens about who they are, what policies they support, and hint at what can be expected of them if entrusted with office. To extract the message, you really only need to get close to the date, since the message was intended to circulate much longer than one year of office. Interpretations also generate criticism, but with interpretation there is no absolute as with dates. And we have to remember that probably a good many people who handled the money never got the message and just spent the money. But considering what we pay for the coins today, I think we will enjoy them more if we say, “Talk to me.”

 

I haven't read it "yet"

red_spork seems to like it (that's a pretty sweet endorsement)

 

Welcome to CT @mharlan

 

Hi @mharlan - I don't think any of the text of your reply made it through, but I'd certainly like to hear your thoughts. As I said, I really enjoyed the book. I've only barely begun reading your "white cover" 63-49 B.C. text but thoroughly enjoying it so far and hope to have a review within the next month or so, maybe sooner.

 

Welcome, @mharlan - and yes, that first post was a quote. Will edit that one to make it a little shorter. @red_spork - the second one is the reply.

Christian

 

Reviving this thread to say that I finally finished Michael Harlan's book 81 -64 BCE (red cover) just before the NYINC this year. I found the book well thought out and quite informative with theories that I hadn't considered before. I bought two denarii from this period at the NYINC and I must say the book influenced my purchases. I'm now re-reading the chapters on those moneyers. I saw the first book (grey book, covering 63-49 BC) at Charles Davis's table in the lobby before the show and intended to pick it up on the last day. It was gone. I intend to order it online soon.